Optimal benthic macrofaunal sampling protocol for detecting differences among four habitats in Willapa Bay, Washington, USA

Effect of sample area and sieve size on benthic macrofaunal community condition assessments in California enclosed bays and estuaries

Benthic macrofauna are used extensively for environmental assessment, but the area sampled and sieve sizes used to capture animals often differ among studies. Here, we sampled 80 sites using 3 different sized sampling areas (0.1, 0.05, 0.0071 m(2)) and sieved those sediments through each of 2 screen sizes (0.5, 1 mm) to evaluate their effect on number of individuals, number of species, dominance, nonmetric multidimensional scaling (MDS) ordination, and benthic community condition indices that are used to assess sediment quality in California. Sample area had little effect on abundance but substantially affected numbers of species, which are not easily scaled to a standard area. Sieve size had a substantial effect on both measures, with the 1-mm screen capturing only 74% of the species and 68% of the individuals collected in the 0.5-mm screen. These differences, though, had little effect on the ability to differentiate samples along gradients in ordination space. Benthic indices generally ranked sample condition in the same order regardless of gear, although the absolute scoring of condition was affected by gear type. The largest differences in condition assessment were observed for the 0.0071-m(2) gear. Benthic indices based on numbers of species were more affected than those based on relative abundance, primarily because we were unable to scale species number to a common area as we did for abundance.

Restoration through eradication? Removal of an invasive bioengineer restores some habitat function for a native predator

Invasive aquatic macrophytes increase structural complexity in recipient systems and alter trophic and physical resources; thus, eradication programs that remove plant structure have potential to restore some impaired ecological functions. In this study we evaluate how an invasive ecosystem engineer, Atlantic smooth cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora), interferes with the movement and foraging activity of a mobile predator, Dungeness crab (Cancer magister), and whether removal of aboveground cordgrass structure rapidly reestablishes access to foraging habitats. By 2004, smooth cordgrass had invaded >25% of crab foraging habitat in Willapa Bay, Washington (USA), and transformed it into a highly structured landscape. However, by 2007 successful eradication efforts had eliminated most meadows of the cordgrass. In order to investigate the effect of smooth cordgrass on the habitat function of littoral areas for foraging crabs, we integrated field, laboratory, and statistical modeling approaches. We conducted trapping surveys at multiple sites and used a hierarchical model framework to examine patterns in catches prior to and following cordgrass removal (i.e., before-after control-impact design, BACI). Prior to eradication, catches of Dungeness crabs in unstructured habitats were 4-19 times higher than catches in adjacent patches of live cordgrass. In contrast, the results of post-eradication trapping in 2007 indicated similar catch rates of crabs in unstructured habitats and areas formerly invaded by the cordgrass. Subsequent laboratory experiments and video observations demonstrated that the rigid physical structure of smooth cordgrass shoots reduces the ability of Dungeness crabs to access prey resources and increases the risk of stranding. Taken together, these findings suggest that eliminating the structural complexity of invasive macrophytes may rapidly restore some ecological function (i.e., foraging area) for migratory predators like Dungeness crab. However, restoration of affected areas to a preinvasion state will also depend on long-term patterns of succession in invaded areas and the degree of persistence of physical changes that continue to alter biotic characteristics of the habitat. Our work highlights: (1) the efficacy of employing multiple methods of inquiry to evaluate causal relationships through mechanisms of interaction, and (2) the importance of targeting particular ecological functions when identifying both short- and long-term goals of restoration efforts.

Sampling strategies to evaluate the status of offshore soft sediment assemblages

Reliable descriptions of the status of offshore seabed habitats usually require substantial investment in field data collection and sample analysis. While assessment of, for example, biogenic reef habitat can often include simple physical parameters (e.g. spatial extent), comparative measures for soft sediment habitats generally rely on the distribution and relative abundance of species, with a description of the associated sedimentary environment. To investigate the power of surveys to detect significant trends in assemblage structure, samples of meiofauna, macroinfauna and megafauna (i.e. representing ecological components from nematodes to demersal fish), were collected from four offshore mud and sand habitat sites in western UK shelf seas during July 2004 and 2005. Spatial arrays of samples within these sites, up to 23 km apart, were designed to optimise descriptions of assemblage structure and the patterns of spatial distribution at a local scale. Analyses of species abundance, biomass and taxonomic relatedness of the species complement at each site suggested that most assemblages represented relatively unimpacted regional conditions. The power of the sampling programme to detect a significant change in univariate community attributes was assessed. The variability in many of the community attributes indicated that intensive replicate sampling would be required to detect ecologically important changes. Improving the power of such benthic surveys to detect trends would therefore require substantial additional time and effort to be invested in sample collection and analysis. Resource analysis showed that the time from gear deployment to complete sample identification was gear-dependent, lowest per sample for meiofauna (10h) and megafauna (6-12h), and highest for macroinfauna (12-22 h). These results have implications for the development of meaningful indicators of habitat status for offshore soft sediment habitats, and the resources required for effective monitoring of change.

A more cost-effective EMAP benthic macrofaunal sampling protocol

Benthic macrofaunal sampling protocols in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (EMAP) are to collect 30 to 50 random benthic macrofauna [defined as animals retained on a 0.5 mm (East and Gulf Coasts, USA) or a 1.0 mm mesh sieve (West Coast, USA)] samples per reporting unit using a 0.044 m(2) (East and Gulf Coasts) or 0.1 m(2) (West Coast) grab. Benthic macrofaunal community conditions in the reporting unit are characterized by cumulative distribution functions (CDFs) on end points of interest, such as number of species (S), abundance (A), and Shannon-Wiener diversity (H'). An EMAP and a companion field study were conducted concurrently in Tillamook Bay (Oregon, USA) to compare the cost effectiveness of benthic macrofauna samples collected using the EMAP West Coast (0.1 m(2) x >or=7 cm deep, 1.0 mm mesh), a 0.01 m(2) x 5 cm deep, 1.0 mm mesh, and a 0.01 m(2) x 5 cm deep, 0.5 mm mesh sampling protocol. Cost was estimated in relative laboratory sample-processing time. Sampling protocols were judged equally effective for EMAP purposes if, after linear transformation to adjust for scale changes in end point distributions, their S, A, and H' CDFs were not significantly different. The 0.01 m(2) x 5 cm deep, 1.0 mm mesh sampling protocol was the most cost effective.